Freedom Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/29/vatican-scandals-lift-lid-on-secret-power-struggle/?hpt=hp_c2I read this article with a grain of salt because, seeing what assumptions are made of our own church, I am suspect of what conclusions people make. Consequently, I don't indent for this to turn into an attack on Catholicism, but rather to contrast this struggle with our own church.There have been very public disputes in the past among the apostles, notably between the 1st presidency under Brigham Young and the quorum of the 12 over leadership styles, and between Joseph Fielding Smith and others over evolution. I know there have been very public disputes over leadership and scandals in many protestant churches, particularly with the mega churches. To my knowledge however, other than a few disputes over procedure and 'doctrine', there has never been internal strife in Salt Lake City. I don't attribute this to the procedure for selecting the president of the church, because having the most senior take the seat can lead to its own intrigue. Are there examples of other centrally organized religions that have had the success we have enjoyed of being free of controversy for some 180 years? There was one excommunication of Elder Lee in the 1980s (I think that was when it was) but otherwise, there have been no sex, political, or criminal scandals of any kind. Despite the hundreds of general authorities serving today, and thousands who have served in the past, there is no example the critics can pull out to taint our religion. This is, in a work, miraculous.
Calm Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 There were a few excommunications over plural marriages, IIRC.
mrmandias Posted May 29, 2012 Posted May 29, 2012 http://religion.blog...ggle/?hpt=hp_c2I read this article with a grain of salt because, seeing what assumptions are made of our own church, I am suspect of what conclusions people make. Consequently, I don't indent for this to turn into an attack on Catholicism, but rather to contrast this struggle with our own church.There have been very public disputes in the past among the apostles, notably between the 1st presidency under Brigham Young and the quorum of the 12 over leadership styles, and between Joseph Fielding Smith and others over evolution. I know there have been very public disputes over leadership and scandals in many protestant churches, particularly with the mega churches. To my knowledge however, other than a few disputes over procedure and 'doctrine', there has never been internal strife in Salt Lake City. I don't attribute this to the procedure for selecting the president of the church, because having the most senior take the seat can lead to its own intrigue.Are there examples of other centrally organized religions that have had the success we have enjoyed of being free of controversy for some 180 years? There was one excommunication of Elder Lee in the 1980s (I think that was when it was) but otherwise, there have been no sex, political, or criminal scandals of any kind. Despite the hundreds of general authorities serving today, and thousands who have served in the past, there is no example the critics can pull out to taint our religion. This is, in a work, miraculous.A few considerations are (1) the Catholic Church is lots bigger and older and (2) less centralized. Both make for some organizational friction.
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Are there examples of other centrally organized religions that have had the success we have enjoyed of being free of controversy for some 180 years? There was one excommunication of Elder Lee in the 1980s (I think that was when it was) but otherwise, there have been no sex, political, or criminal scandals of any kind. Despite the hundreds of general authorities serving today, and thousands who have served in the past, there is no example the critics can pull out to taint our religion. This is, in a work, miraculous.I know that in the 90's the Brethren had (mostly amicable but with strong feelings on both sides) disagreements over how active in the media the Church should be.The Catholic Church is facing some rough times. The horrible stories of child abuse have tainted their entire priesthood. I feel bad for innocent priests who have had any of their moral authority stripped away. Add to that the at least seeming contradiction of wringing their hands about how they can't stop pedophilia with their 'bring out the big guns' attacks attempt to exert authority over nuns, girl scouts, and various others and they seem ridiculous.As for no sex, political, or criminal scandals in the LDS church that is truer of us then most organizations but to say there weren't any is false. They have been blissfully few but they are there.
Storm Rider Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 The current trials in the leadership of the Catholic Church is painful to see and hear about. We have so many faithful disciples of Christ found within the walls of the CC and I know that this is as painful for them as it would be for us. These are the times when we should extend our love and support to them as much as is possible.The Brethren stive to always present a unified profile to the membership and to the world. As has been stated there have been a few issues that have presented themselves over the years within our own leadership. It is unfortunate and deeply sad when any church experiences such difficult times. Poor choices always have consequences; they may be delayed, but they always come back to haunt us.
cinepro Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 As for no sex, political, or criminal scandals in the LDS church that is truer of us then most organizations but to say there weren't any is false. They have been blissfully few but they are there.While the Church's discretion in such matters is laudable, it does have the side-effect of Church members perhaps underestimating the frequency with which such incidents occur.
Buzzard Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 The last "sex" scandal in the church was back in the 40's. An apostle was exed for having an affair with his secretary. He was rebaptized, but died before his temple blessings could be restored. Don't know much about it other than that.
Freedom Posted May 30, 2012 Author Posted May 30, 2012 As time has gone on, the leadership has become more united and more disciplined. The quality of the leadership has risen with greater experience and expertise. Having seen the workings of the Southern Baptist Convention and the Anglican Church, who do not have the tradition of 'follow the brethren', there are a lot of squabbles and open political wrangling. Nevertheless, we are ultimately directed by humans and I don't discount the possibility of an indiscretion. It just fascinates me that there are no skeletons in any of the closets of our church leaders. The critics keep digging but do date, nobody has come forward with any fodder.
Kenngo1969 Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) I'm not sure how Prince's and Wright's David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism treats the subject. (I'm poor; can't afford the book). Ditto for Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power. Edited May 30, 2012 by Kenngo1969
KevinG Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 Those who do not know better confuse an effort to focus on the basics of our religion (Christ and Salvation) in public with lack of individual opinion on more tengential matters (Evolution, BOM geography).
cinepro Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) The last "sex" scandal in the church was back in the 40's. An apostle was exed for having an affair with his secretary. He was rebaptized, but died before his temple blessings could be restored. Don't know much about it other than that.Richard Lyman.Granted, he thought the "affair" was a polygamous relationship only he and the woman knew about, but by 1943, that line of reasoning wasn't very helpful.An even worse line of reasoning was employed by apostle Albert Carrington in the 1880's. During his disciplinary council, he argued that even though he had engaged in "the act", he hadn't "gone the whole figure" (i.e. carried the act to "completion"), and therefore no sin was committed. You can hear the whole story starting at 11:30 in this Sunstone presentation (the most interesting part is at 14:30):Love, Sex and Transgression - Gary James Bergera Edited May 30, 2012 by cinepro
DBMormon Posted May 30, 2012 Posted May 30, 2012 On Nov. 11, 1943, LDS apostles Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B. Lee gathered with Salt Lake City police officers, including Chief Reed Vetterli, outside the small Center Street apartment of elderly Anna Sofie Jacobsen. The apostles and officers burst into the home, breaking the door according to some accounts, and discovered LDS Apostle, Richard R. Lyman, 74, in bed with Jacobsen, who was not his wife. After gathering evidence, the two apostles reported back to J. Reuben Clark, first counselor to LDS President Heber J. Grant. Clark, who handled most of the church’s duties because Grant was ill, had ordered the raid. A day later, Lyman was excommunicated “for violation of the Christian law of chastity.”
Freedom Posted May 30, 2012 Author Posted May 30, 2012 On Nov. 11, 1943, LDS apostles Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B. Lee gathered with Salt Lake City police officers, including Chief Reed Vetterli, outside the small Center Street apartment of elderly Anna Sofie Jacobsen. The apostles and officers burst into the home, breaking the door according to some accounts, and discovered LDS Apostle, Richard R. Lyman, 74, in bed with Jacobsen, who was not his wife. After gathering evidence, the two apostles reported back to J. Reuben Clark, first counselor to LDS President Heber J. Grant. Clark, who handled most of the church’s duties because Grant was ill, had ordered the raid. A day later, Lyman was excommunicated “for violation of the Christian law of chastity.”Nice. Macgyver style church discipline.
The Nehor Posted May 31, 2012 Posted May 31, 2012 An even worse line of reasoning was employed by apostle Albert Carrington in the 1880's. During his disciplinary council, he argued that even though he had engaged in "the act", he hadn't "gone the whole figure" (i.e. carried the act to "completion"), and therefore no sin was committed.Wait, someone who was older then 18 actually used that reasoning? I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.
Recommended Posts